2008 (9) TMI 388

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ms, in its proper perspective? (ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has committed substantial error of law by ignoring the material and relevant facts and by not applying legal principles, in appreciating the evidence? (iii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has misread and also construed the statements of noticees recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 to be in the nature of statements of the co-accused? (iv) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, letter of Shri Pragnesh Rajendrakumar Chokshi be construed as voluntary and true retraction from his earlier statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 on 9-4-1999? (v) Whether....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ggling activities. The Tribunal has ignored all these evidences and has come to the conclusion that except the statement of the co-accused, there was no independent evidence and accordingly, the penalty was deleted. He has, therefore, submitted that the questions proposed by the Revenue are the substantial questions of law and the appeals require admission. 3. We have considered the submissions made by Mr. Oza and also gone through the orders passed by the Commissioner of Customs as well as the Tribunal. The Commissioner has discussed this issue in paragraphs 48 to 58 of his order. He has not believed the retraction of Mr. Pragnesh Choksi and accepted the original statement given by Mr. Choksi. After considering the evidence on record an....